Dismissed¶21

Sonu Sahani @ Sonu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Dec 2024CR. MISC./81968/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail dismissed; High Court of Judicature at Patna; Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan; Criminal Miscellaneous No.81968 of 2024 (CR. MISC. No.81968 of 2024(2)); decided 10-12-2024; petitioner Sonu Sahani @ Sonu Kumar apprehending arrest; Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 33 of 2024, District Muzaffarpur; offence u/s 392 IPC; Rs. 1,24,210/- and two mobile phones looted from C.S.P. centre; counsel Sanjay Parasmani for petitioner, APP Yogendra Kumar Singh for State; prayer for anticipatory bail rejected; application dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail; the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. ¶20

Sonu Sahani @ Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81968 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2024 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Sonu Sahani @ Sonu Kumar Son of Rajendra Sahani Resident of Gaura, Bishunpour Kalyan, P.S- Sahebgunj, District- Muzaffarpur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Parasmani, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 10-12-2024

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶13

Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 33 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable u/s 392 of the IPC.

¶14

As per prosecution case, some accused persons entered the complainant’s C.S.P. centre and looted Rs. 1,24,210/- and two mobile phones.

¶15

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. No such occurrence in the manner as alleged has ever taken place. Petitioner has one criminal antecedent.

¶16